Talk:Bipolar outflow

Jets do not remove substantial angular momentum

The article contained the statement "The outflow relieves the build-up of angular momentum as material spirals down onto the central star through the accretion disk. Indeed, without the outflow, disk accretion would not be possible and the star would never form." This is not supported by a citation and is, in fact, incorrect. This is easy to understand: Angular momentum is conserved, and an axial jet cannot and does not carry away substantial angular momentum. I removed the statement. If someone restores it, they should include a citation. 86.130.244.109 (talk) 14:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added this back with reference to a review article. The outflowing material is also rotating. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bipolar outflow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should be split

I think this article should be split into two because the two kind of objects mentioned in the first sentence are not related at all. There is very little mentioned about the molecular outflows observed in CO such as L1551. The optical objects should be discussed in protoplanetary nebulae which are often bipolar. Hobbema (talk) 17:49, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Or it should go to bipolar nebula which is the same as the latter kind of bipolar outflow. Hobbema (talk) 10:42, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]